Sample Comment for the Darlington Nuclear Public Hearing
You can support green energy and protect our communities, pocketbook and environment by speaking out against rebuilding the Darlington nuclear station.
The deadline is tonight September 28 at midnight. Let the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) know that you oppose Ontario Power Generation’s application for an unprecedented thirteen year license to operate the Darlington nuclear station. Most license renewal applications are for 5 years.
Please take a minute to send your comments to the CNSC. We’ve provided a sample letter below that we recommend you edit into your own words.
Thanks for taking the time to make a difference.
PS: Your email must have Darlington Public Hearing in the subject line. You must include your name, address and telephone number in the email. You need to make it clear that you are only submitting written comments unless you would also like to make an oral presentation in November.
Send by midnight on Sep 28 by email to email@example.com.
(Subject Line for Your Email: Darlington Public Hearing)
c/o Louise Levert
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
280 Slater St., P.O. Box 1046
Written Submission Only
Dear Louise Levert:
I’m opposed to Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) application for an unprecedented 13 year license to operate the Darlington nuclear station. Nuclear power is too risky to grant Darlington a 13 year license. In fact, no private company will insure it and plans to deal with a nuclear emergency or radioactive waste are inadequate.
I am deeply concerned that offsite emergency response plans at Darlington will not be able to cope with a Fukushima scale accident. This is unacceptable for a nuclear plant located in the most densely populated region in Canada. Before OPG is allowed to rebuild the Darlington nuclear station they should be required to prove their emergency plans can protect Ontarians.
I’m especially concerned that OPG’s unprecedented request for a 13 year license will reduce public transparency. Reduced scrutiny may also increase the risk of accidents. No Canadian nuclear power reactor operator has ever been given such a long licence. For the past 50 years, Canadian nuclear stations have been given 2 - 5 year licences.
It makes no financial sense to grant Darlington a 13-year license and permission to rebuild the four aging Darlington reactors without an independent review of the costs and alternatives to rebuilding the Darlington nuclear station.
No nuclear plant in Canadian history has delivered on time or on budget. The cost of renewable energy is dropping rapidly. Currently available water power from Quebec and conservation programs are already less expensive than nuclear power. We would be better served in Ontario to examine these options over expensive, risky nuclear power.
The costs and risks associated with nuclear power are far too high to grant OPG’s request for a 13 year license to operate Darlington. I ask that the CNSC reject OPG’s license application for Darlington.
(You must include your name, address and telephone number)